Community Based Watershed Management In

Bangladesh
Introduction
Bangladesh with its population of 123.1 million and a land area of 14.757 million ha is one of the
densely populated countries (834 persons/sq. km.) in the world with a per capita land availability
of a mere 0.12 ha (Mondal et al. 2004). Most of the land surface in this country is formed by the
recent delta and alluvial plains of the Ganges,Brahmaputra and Meghna rivers.Within the alluvial
plain there are several slightly elevated areas of older alluvium called terraces. The highest areas
are the hilly region consisting of a series of valleys and ridges varying in elevation between 70
and 1000 m on the northeast, east and southeast margins of the country fig(1), Because of the
geographic and geological conditions, most of the land surface of the country could be thought of
having a number of water catchments or watersheds. Being a lower riparian country watershed
management bears a strong significance for the country’s ecological and economic
health.Although watershed boundaries are not very clear in the plains,in hilly areas as in
Chittagong and Chittagong Hill Tracts, they are well defined (Khan 1991). The current
environmental concerns now in the region are rapid depletion of natural forest resources, land,
watershed degradation due to improper land use practices mainly by the migrants and
theshortened rotational jhum cycles by some indigenous groups. These factors combinedly
causesoil erosion, siltation of lakes and rivers and soil fertility decline thereby creating a
foodinsecurity situation in the region (Khisa et al. 2006).

Community Based watershed Management

Community-based watershed management is an approach to water-resource
protection that enables individuals, groups, and institutions with a stake in
management outcomes (often called stakeholders) to participatein identifying and
addressing local issues that affect or are affected bywatershed functions. some key
stakeholders include those people who have the authority to make land-use
decisions, such as individual landowners, farmers, and local government
government officials. Other stakeholders may include representatives from
environmental and community groups, schools, Department of Natural Resources
the local Soil and Water Conservation Districts etc.

Proponents of community-based watershed management maintain that involving

local stakeholders results in more locally relevant solutions that take into account
each community's unique social, economic, and environmental conditions and
values. . Stakeholder participation is also thought to create a sense of local
ownership of identified problems and solutions, thus ensuring long-term support for
resulting management plans.

Characteristics of Community-Based Watershed Management

Changing Roles and Relationships: As local communities participate more actively in
watershed management, the roles and relationships of resource managers and stakeholders will
change. Traditionally, resource managers were viewed as experts who were uniquely qualified to
identify and implement watershed management strategies. But community-based watershed
management recognizes that all stakeholders have a critical role to play in the management
planning process. Resource managers and other stakeholders can contribute in many different
ways, but all must work collaboratively to understand and address watershed issues when a
community-based approach is used.

Whole-System Perspective: Watershed management is not a single strategy, but is a general

approach to water resource protection that recognizes the interconnectedness of all the physical
and biological components of the landscape, including human communities. A community-based
approach considers not only the physical characteristics of a watershed, but it also takes into
account the social and economic factors associated with watershed issues. The goal of
community-based watershed management is to protect and restore watershed functions while
considering the variety of social and economic benefits of those functions.

Integration of Scientific Information and Societal Values: Watershed management decisions

should be based on sound scientific information, both in terms of identifying problems and
selecting options for addressing those problems. However, resource managers have learned that
management decisions that are based on scientific evidence alone often fail in the long-run
because they conflict with a community's economic or other social values. Community-based
approaches to watershed management attempt to incorporate a broad range of values in the
management process by involving representatives from a diverse cross-section of the community
throughout the management planning process. In some cases, by involving diverse interests early
on, value conflicts can be resolved during the planning process, thereby avoiding more costly
battles once plans are put into action.

Adaptive Management Style: Addressing environmental, social, and economic issues at the
watershed scale is complex, and often there is a high level of uncertainty regarding the outcomes
of management decisions. Effective community-based watershed management entails an
experimental approach to management in the sense that participants must be prepared to learn
from their mistakes and to adapt their management strategies to changing conditions. In many
ways, watershed management planning is never complete, because as old issues are resolved,
new ones arise. For this reason, the long-term commitment of the stakeholders involved in a
community-based watershed-management project is critical to its success.

Challenges Associated With Community-Based Watershed Management

Community-based watershed management is not easy, nor is it always effective at protecting or

restoring watershed functions. Some of the challenges faced by those who adopt a community-
based approach include the following:

• Watersheds may cover thousands of acres of public and privately owned land.
Developing even a basic understanding of how human activities affect watershed
functions is a major undertaking.
 • Some key stakeholders may lack the time, motivation, skills, or resources to participate
effectively throughout the management planning process.
• Resource management professionals may be reluctant to give up their role as experts and
to share authority with lay persons regarding resource management issues.
• Conflicts between stakeholders over management goals and the means to accomplishing
those goals are inevitable, and resource management professionals are often ill-prepared
to facilitate constructive dialogue to resolve these conflicts.
• Community-based approaches require time and resources to generate interest and to build
relationships between stakeholders. Funding agencies and stakeholders may grow
impatient with the lack of observable outcomes.

Keys to Success

There is no easy formula for successful community-based watershed management. However,

experience from efforts around the country and in suggests that several key factors, such as those
listed here, are common to many successful projects.

• Involve stakeholders in the management planning process in a way that is meaningful to

them and that allows them to use their particular skills and knowledge most effectively.
• Don't be discouraged if some stakeholders choose not to participate initially. Begin by
educating and informing key audiences about the values of the watershed to the
community, the watershed management process, and specific actions they can take to get
involved.
• Determine the appropriate scale for addressing watershed problems. Actions aimed at
changing land-use practices are easiest to implement at the local level and become more
difficult to manage on a larger scale.
• View the watershed management plan as a starting point and not the end product. Be
prepared to adapt the plan as conditions change and groups learn from their mistakes.
• Make management decisions, when possible, based on a consensus of a broad range of
stakeholders. Efforts to resolve conflicts before management decisions are made pay
dividends in the long run.
• Focus on desired outcomes (e.g., clean water), which can often be more helpful and
motivating for participants than emphasizing problems and who is causing them.

Context of watershed management in the hilly areas of Bangladesh

Forests of the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHTs) in the south eastern part of Bangladesh occupy
about 30% of the nation’s total forest area and represent the most valuable watersheds of the
country. Their importance lies not only in providing soil and water conservation for sustainable
natural resources management in this part of the country but also in supporting subsistence
farming to 13 forest-dwelling indigenous communities. An area that consists of 77%sloping land
was once covered by natural forests (Roy and Halim 2001) and used to principally support
shifting cultivation. However, over the last two centuries the land use of the area has gone under
a tremendous change that involved clear felling of forest trees to make way for establishment of
mostly monoculture plantations of valuable timber species such as Teak (Tectona grandis) and
fruit trees, and other economically important cash crops. Due to scarcity of land and flood havoc
in other parts of the country almost every year people have been migrating to the CHTs.The
population of the area, according to the latest census conducted in 2001,stands at 1.06 million,
which is 0.14 percent of the national population of 129.25million. Over a period of 50 years, the
density of population in the area has goneup from 22 per km2 in 1951 to 78 per km2 in 2001,
marking an increase of 354.54 percent. Population explosion necessitated an expansion of
agriculturalactivities in the hilly landscape at the cost of environmental values of the watersheds.
Degradation of watersheds accelerated due to the combined effects of deforestation and
unsystematic practices of slash and burn agriculture.Watershed degradation has contributed to
severe soil erosion and deteriorationof water quality.

Different Aspcet of watershed management In Bangladesh

However, in the present context, watershed management is not only for managing or conserving
natural resources in a holistic manner, but also to involve local people for betterment of their
lives (Mountain, 2002). Thus, modern watershed management is more people oriented and process
based, unlike many of the programs in the past, which were physically target oriented. It is meant
to fit into the farmers’ lifestyles rather than merelyfulfilling the purposes of donors, governments,
or non-government agencies and others aspect are 1. Farm production, 2. Livelihoods of the
communities, 3. Community based socio-economic activities, 4. Applied science and participatory
approach, 5. People oriented etc.

Key issues and problems in watershed management

Reserved forests and Jhum

Traditionally, the communities practice a farming method called jhum. This basically
involves cultivation of food crops in forest land through clearing and burning of
undergrowth in the dry season, usually leaving a certain fallow period of 3-15 years
between successive crops on the same piece of land. However, population pressure
and the inclusion of jhum land in reserved forest has necessitated higher production
from an ever shrinking land base. This has gradually shortened the fallow period to
as little as two or one years, contributing to a sharp decline in productivity and
deterioration of the forest ecosystem.

Monoculture plantation versus mixed cropping

Successive governments leased out big chunks of forest land for cultivation of
monoculture crops such as rubber and other horticultural species. These deals were
often based on economic considerations only, and ignored traditional user rights
and values. Ethnic communities were also encouraged to implement monoculture
farming strategies through land allocation policies. Subsequent unsystematic tillage
on the hill slopes for establishment of monoculture plantations has led to serious
land degradation.

Use and exploitation of natural resources

The extent and intensity of exploitation of natural resources in the hills is an
important controlling factor in the conservation of watersheds and sustainable
livelihoods. Seasonality of resource extraction and harvesting of forest produce is
crucial to the food security of the inhabitants and plays a key role in controlling soil
and water quality.

Cultural operations and plantation establishment techniques

Land preparation prior to establishment of monoculture plantations involves
uprooting of tree stumps and burning of debris on the forest floor. In the clear-felled
former forests this leads to serious soil erosion and depletion of soil moisture. The
most serious problem with regard to gardening, particularly of pineapple citrus
fruits, and some root crops such as ginger and turmeric, is the direct exposure of
the soil surface to heavy downpour and surface runoff. This results in top soil
erosion, which causes gradually diminishing harvests of the concerned crops, and
ultimately also renders the land virtually useless for further cultivation or plantation
purposes.

Apathy of government agencies

Bangladesh has lagged behind neighbours such as Nepal and Thailand in the
promotion of watershed management, largely because the subject failed to receive
adequate attention from the relevant policy makers or major international
development partners. The recent increase in sedimentation and soil erosion in the
CHTs since the end of the twentieth century has significantly increased the level of
concern in the government. The FD plans to introduce participatory agroforestry in
the degraded lands in the near future, through adopting uniform cropping models
that may not be suitable to the heterogeneous landscape conditions of the CHTs
and could therefore create further environmental problems for the indigenous
communities.

Key results and lessons

VCF(Village Community Forest) management
Since 1900, VCFs have presented excellent examples of traditional forest
management by the indigenous communities in the CHTs. A committee headed by
the karbari (village head) manages the VCF according to customary rules and laws.
The natural forest land under the VCF is never used for jhum cultivation. Harvesting
of forest products from the VCFs is only permitted by the village leader on the basis
of a collective decision from the committee members and only when there is
demand for the internal use of such products, and not for commercial sale or
individual cash earning. Usually, timber is not extracted from VCFs except when
required for community uses such as the construction of schools or prayer centres.
However, the harvest of firewood, culinary herbs and non-wood products such as
bamboo is permitted. Very poor villagers, who cannot afford to buy house
construction materials, are given special consideration by the VCF management
committee to harvest wood, bamboo and sun grass. Generally, forest resources are
open to all households in the community but everyone requires permission from the
VCF management committee. One striking example of plant conservation practiced
by the communities is that only the local kabiraj or medicine men who treat the sick
are permitted to enter VCFs for the collection of medicinal herbs.
VCF as a means of conservation and livelihood
The presence of good understorey vegetation consisting of many herbs and other
plants is the primary indicator of good site conditions prevailing in the VCF areas.
These understoreys are helpful to soil and water conservation. In some places,
communities are totally dependent on VCFs to sustain the water flow of perennial
streams so as to meet year round water requirements. Besides VCF management,
the indigenous techniques of jhum cultivation such as terracing, minimum tillage,
controlled burning of debris, mulching and gully control by vegetative cover appear
to have a time-tested and proven positive impact on soil and water conservation.
Generally, people in the VCF communities have been found to be more meticulous
in gathering forest produce or hunting animals than those in the non-VCF
communities. They do not harvest or hunt anything in short supply and strictly
maintain seasonality in harvesting, thereby helping the regeneration of these
resources and securing their conservation. VCFs do not appear to satisfy all the
livelihood needs of the communities because most family members have to work as
daily wage-labourers. Some practice jhum for subsistence and a few depend on
government food subsidies for their of staple food supply (rice). However, annual
overhead costs towards construction and repair of houses are largely offset through
the harvesting of house construction materials from the VCFs. Gathering of culinary
and medicinal herbs from the VCFs remains a year round activity and provides
essential supplements to the communities’ dietary and medicinal requirements. In
some cases, pressure on VCFs in response to an increased demand for forest
produces by the communities is posing a threat to their long term sustainability.
Enhancing livelihood opportunities for the VCF communities
To reduce the growing pressure on VCFs caused by increased collection of forest
produce, it would seem feasible to develop appropriate farming technologies in line
with indigenous knowledge. Respondents who were familiarised with ‘Sloping
Agricultural Land Technology’, particularly from those Banderban, appeared to show
an interest in these techniques which help the formation of natural terraces through
gradual stabilisation of soil by farming contoured lines of hedgerows of suitable
plants among forest trees.
Policy implications of research results
This study demonstrates that there is a huge potential for VCFs in the conservation
of forest, soil and water in some critical locations, and that there is a wealth of
indigenous knowledge and cultures involved in management of these resources.
While many government projects have so far failed to address land degradation
problem in most parts of the CHTs, many VCFs still stand protected against
degradation without support from such projects. VCFs could certainly act as models
of resource conservation in the degraded hilly landscape. However, a big constraint
to these community forests is lack of tenure security, especially in view of the
pressure from the FD to acquire the land for monoculture plantation purposes. This
trend must change, and the existence of VCFs needs to be formalised within the
context of the land use policy for the hilly areas of the country. In addition,
government and non-government agencies should take measures for raising the
socio-economic conditions of indigenous communities and encourage them to take
responsibility for the rejuvenation of the already deteriorating VCFs.

Conclusions and recommendations

The communities in the CHTs require the forests for their livelihoods. Besides
depending on jhum as the principal means of sustenance, they need bamboo poles,
canes etc. to repair their houses, firewood for domestic consumption, medicinal
plants for their health, and many other minor forest products as part of their daily
diet. These resources are gradually shrinking with the decrease in forest. VCFs are
not recognised by government agencies and there is no technical and financial
support from any government department to maintain them. The important role of
these community protected forests in the livelihoods and cultures of indigenous
communities should be recognised, including their function in local water supply
protection and as a social safety net for the poorest. Therefore if VCF areas can
remain protected, by helping the communities looking after them to achieve better
living conditions, the hilly watersheds may in part save themselves from further
degradation. The long-term sustainability of these VCFs will depend upon how
useful the local communities feel these forests are to their everyday lives. Given the
rising prices of timber and bamboo, the economic justification for VCFs will likely
remain for a long time yet. The main threats to the sustainability of VCFs are
population pressure and scarcity of agricultural land. This problem will have to be
met primarily by the villagers themselves although external agencies can extend a
helping hand. The fact that VCFs have survived for such a long time, despite their
gradually diminishing area, suggests that some communities can sustain their VCFs
while others fail. Lessons will have to be drawn from these successes and failures.
Awareness and capacity building seem to be important measures for helping
sustainability of the VCFs, but ultimately tenurial security might prove to be the
crucial factor in their long-term sustenance. This issue will require the political
support of the government.

9. References
Roy, R.D. and Halim, S. 2001. Protecting village commons in Forestry: A case
from the Chittagong Hill Tracts. In Chowdhury, Q I. ed. Chittagong Hill Tracts:
State of Environment, Dhaka: Forum of Environmental Journalists of Bangladesh
(FEJB).
Mondal, M. I., Kader, M. B., Iqbal, Z. M., Haque, M. O., and Begum, R. eds. 2004.
Participatory
Forestry Newsletter, June 2004. Bulletin No. 2, a Quarterly Newsletter of Forest Department’s
Ongoing Forestry Sector Project.
Khan, L. R. 1991. Watershed Management. UNDP/FAO BGD/85/011. Field Document No. 24.
Institute of Forestry, Chittagong University, Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Khisa, S. K., Shoaib, J. M., and Khan, N. A. eds. 2006. Selected Natural Resource Conservation
Approaches and Technologies in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh. Bangladesh
Conservation Approaches and Technologies (BANCAT), SDC-Intercooperation and Institute of
Forestry and Environmental Sciences, Chittagong University, Chittagong, Bangladesh.